I had no idea that the story would end the way it did (I will not reveal the ending for those who have not read it). However, when Barron was not seen after entering Miss Emily's house for the last time, I suspected something was amiss. Faulkner's plot arrangement with the flashback to the narrator's memories from Miss Emily's life allowed one to focus on each individual scene. The technique of placing clues out of chronological order was confusing and assisted the author's plan to surprise readers at the end.
I was pretty shocked by the ending. I didn't fully understand what had happened, so I reread the story again so I could fully grasp the situation. The first time that I read through the story I was sort of bored, I didn't understand why Faulkner was telling so much about an old woman. However, the way he told the story made it that much more interesting at the end. He revealed bits and pieces of her life, but the final scene is what made the story make sense.
Just like bekaht12 and annamac said, the end shocked me! I was, honestly, not expecting it at all. Yet, it makes sense. The author described Miss Emily's reaction to the death of her father as unbelieving (sorry I can not think of the right word). She did not want to accept being left alone, revealing her to be scared. She left Barron where he was because she did not want to be alone. But the thought of it still creeps me out! I also agree with bekaht12 in stating that the clues where confusing and it took me a second time of reading it to understand and allow me to focus on what was happening at the time and not what was coming in the end.
I was definitely suprised by the ending. I did not see that coming at all. I agree with annamac with the fact that I was bored when I read the story at first. Faulkner's arrangement of the plot made the story more engaging but also very confusing. I think that he purposely tried to confuse his readers with the plot arrangement to help with the surprise at the end. I did not know what to expect at the end, but what happened was a shock. Faulkner made Miss Emily seem scared of being alone, and he also made her seem a bit strange. Once I read the end, Faulkner's arrangement of the plot made sense in a way. He wanted to shock his readers, and he did an excellent job of doing just that.
The ending was definitely not to be expected. Like annamac said, I was very bored the first time I read and it was not until the ending that I fully understood what was going on in the story. The way Faulkner played the plot out story by story, there was no real connection seen until he began wrapping the the story up as a whole. I also, in a way, enjoyed the way he played the plot out seperatly because then the ending was a true surprise. Unlike other authors and stories and books, the reader could not guess what was going to happen in the end, keeping the surprise a true shocking ending.
The first time I read the story, I did not understand it at all. I was very confused by the arrangement of the plot. After reading it a second time and focusing on the first paragraph at Miss Emily's funeral, I never expected Miss Emily to be hiding a dead body in her house. She was a well respected woman in the community, and the way Faulkner protrayed her made me think she would never kill a man. Faulkner definitely did an excellent job of surprising me about Miss Emily.
You don't see people kill their lover and keep their body in a room for 40 years everyday, so I was quite surpirised at the ending. The way Faulkner arranges Miss Emily's funeral scene at the beginning of the story leaves the reader unexpected of the climax. He also mixed up the order of important events so the readers would not understand their significance until the very end of the story. Also, all the townspeople felt sorry for Miss Emily, because they thought Homer had left her, but in reality they should have felt bad for Homer, because Miss Emily murdered him. Faulkner did an excellent job writing this short story and his arrangment of events were genius.
I must say Faulkner's story totally confused me. After first reading the first two pages i had no idea what was going on, so I decided to restart the story. After reading it again, I realized the plot was not in order causing me to question and wonder every step of the story. I did not believe the story would end the way it did. Because the story was not in order, I could not speculate what was going to happen in the end.
To start the story with the death seemed a little bit odd, it threw me off of the real point of the story, of course, doing it the conventional way would show what was coming quite easy, as we said in class. Even at the end, I still did not realize exactly what had happened but when I retraced back to a certain word (not stating to ruin the ending) and the piece of hair, I knew exactly what was happening in that closed off section of the house and why she kept it a secret. She was too afraid of any sort of change in her life, that even in death, she still kept things the way they were. Quite creepy, but anyone can relate to it. It is like selling your house and moving. Of course you do not want to go because you like things the way they are and would not like the change; that's how I felt for a bit. Of course, we can relate to her fear of change a little but, I'm sure we cannot relate to the extreme fear of change she showed.
What a morbid story, indeed. Of course, inexperienced readers may not understand what is hinted at in the end, but there are sure signs of necrophilia revealed there. Aside from this horrendous deed, much grotesque imagery (such as the dust, which symbolizes decay but also a sort of perpetual adherence to the past) and the theme of insanity are quite evident. Two elements of Faulkner's short story help to fully establish the disturbing atmosphere that it possesses. Its briefness adds to its theme of insanity, cutting off quickly after the corpse is revealed, and the narrator’s perspective (being a member of the society) validates Emily's cryptic nature, as the society around her knows nothing, truly, about her life.
I most certainly did not anticipate the novel to end the way it did. The creepiness and ghastliness of what Emily was doing behind the walls of her home was, in my mind, unbelievable. Even though there were some clues of Emily's mischief given by Faulkner throughout the story, I never expected it to be what it was. Also, Faulkner's arrangement of the plot was phenomenal because it kept me on the edge and never allowed me to predict what would happen. The ending came as a sure surprise to me due to Faulkner's scattered plot arrangement and excellent writing.
I was pretty surprised with the entire plot and especially the ending of the story. The scenario was very intriguing though. As Cdm37 stated "You don't see people kill their lover and keep their body for 40 years everyday." Faulkners style of mixing up the chronological order made the story much more enjoyable to read and added a sense of the unknown for all of the readers. Looking back, I never would think that such a well respected woman like Miss Emily would turn out to be as unstable and insane as she was.
This story was definitely one of its own. It was a story that was very confusing that made the reader think about what was going on with every step of the passage of Miss. Emily Grierson. I agree with K.Dubb and never saw the end coming. It is very strange that a woman will kill the only man that ever loved her and still keep him there stored away. I also agree with bekaht12 as the use of the flashback in this story gave a better focus on each scene of Miss Emily's life. It was a very different story but one that kept the reader on the edge of his seat the entire time.
13 comments:
I had no idea that the story would end the way it did (I will not reveal the ending for those who have not read it). However, when Barron was not seen after entering Miss Emily's house for the last time, I suspected something was amiss. Faulkner's plot arrangement with the flashback to the narrator's memories from Miss Emily's life allowed one to focus on each individual scene. The technique of placing clues out of chronological order was confusing and assisted the author's plan to surprise readers at the end.
I was pretty shocked by the ending. I didn't fully understand what had happened, so I reread the story again so I could fully grasp the situation. The first time that I read through the story I was sort of bored, I didn't understand why Faulkner was telling so much about an old woman. However, the way he told the story made it that much more interesting at the end. He revealed bits and pieces of her life, but the final scene is what made the story make sense.
Just like bekaht12 and annamac said, the end shocked me! I was, honestly, not expecting it at all. Yet, it makes sense. The author described Miss Emily's reaction to the death of her father as unbelieving (sorry I can not think of the right word). She did not want to accept being left alone, revealing her to be scared. She left Barron where he was because she did not want to be alone. But the thought of it still creeps me out! I also agree with bekaht12 in stating that the clues where confusing and it took me a second time of reading it to understand and allow me to focus on what was happening at the time and not what was coming in the end.
I was definitely suprised by the ending. I did not see that coming at all. I agree with annamac with the fact that I was bored when I read the story at first. Faulkner's arrangement of the plot made the story more engaging but also very confusing. I think that he purposely tried to confuse his readers with the plot arrangement to help with the surprise at the end. I did not know what to expect at the end, but what happened was a shock. Faulkner made Miss Emily seem scared of being alone, and he also made her seem a bit strange. Once I read the end, Faulkner's arrangement of the plot made sense in a way. He wanted to shock his readers, and he did an excellent job of doing just that.
The ending was definitely not to be expected. Like annamac said, I was very bored the first time I read and it was not until the ending that I fully understood what was going on in the story. The way Faulkner played the plot out story by story, there was no real connection seen until he began wrapping the the story up as a whole. I also, in a way, enjoyed the way he played the plot out seperatly because then the ending was a true surprise. Unlike other authors and stories and books, the reader could not guess what was going to happen in the end, keeping the surprise a true shocking ending.
The first time I read the story, I did not understand it at all. I was very confused by the arrangement of the plot. After reading it a second time and focusing on the first paragraph at Miss Emily's funeral, I never expected Miss Emily to be hiding a dead body in her house. She was a well respected woman in the community, and the way Faulkner protrayed her made me think she would never kill a man. Faulkner definitely did an excellent job of surprising me about Miss Emily.
You don't see people kill their lover and keep their body in a room for 40 years everyday, so I was quite surpirised at the ending. The way Faulkner arranges Miss Emily's funeral scene at the beginning of the story leaves the reader unexpected of the climax. He also mixed up the order of important events so the readers would not understand their significance until the very end of the story. Also, all the townspeople felt sorry for Miss Emily, because they thought Homer had left her, but in reality they should have felt bad for Homer, because Miss Emily murdered him. Faulkner did an excellent job writing this short story and his arrangment of events were genius.
I must say Faulkner's story totally confused me. After first reading the first two pages i had no idea what was going on, so I decided to restart the story. After reading it again, I realized the plot was not in order causing me to question and wonder every step of the story. I did not believe the story would end the way it did. Because the story was not in order, I could not speculate what was going to happen in the end.
To start the story with the death seemed a little bit odd, it threw me off of the real point of the story, of course, doing it the conventional way would show what was coming quite easy, as we said in class. Even at the end, I still did not realize exactly what had happened but when I retraced back to a certain word (not stating to ruin the ending) and the piece of hair, I knew exactly what was happening in that closed off section of the house and why she kept it a secret. She was too afraid of any sort of change in her life, that even in death, she still kept things the way they were. Quite creepy, but anyone can relate to it. It is like selling your house and moving. Of course you do not want to go because you like things the way they are and would not like the change; that's how I felt for a bit. Of course, we can relate to her fear of change a little but, I'm sure we cannot relate to the extreme fear of change she showed.
What a morbid story, indeed. Of course, inexperienced readers may not understand what is hinted at in the end, but there are sure signs of necrophilia revealed there. Aside from this horrendous deed, much grotesque imagery (such as the dust, which symbolizes decay but also a sort of perpetual adherence to the past) and the theme of insanity are quite evident. Two elements of Faulkner's short story help to fully establish the disturbing atmosphere that it possesses. Its briefness adds to its theme of insanity, cutting off quickly after the corpse is revealed, and the narrator’s perspective (being a member of the society) validates Emily's cryptic nature, as the society around her knows nothing, truly, about her life.
I most certainly did not anticipate the novel to end the way it did. The creepiness and ghastliness of what Emily was doing behind the walls of her home was, in my mind, unbelievable. Even though there were some clues of Emily's mischief given by Faulkner throughout the story, I never expected it to be what it was. Also, Faulkner's arrangement of the plot was phenomenal because it kept me on the edge and never allowed me to predict what would happen. The ending came as a sure surprise to me due to Faulkner's scattered plot arrangement and excellent writing.
I was pretty surprised with the entire plot and especially the ending of the story. The scenario was very intriguing though. As Cdm37 stated "You don't see people kill their lover and keep their body for 40 years everyday." Faulkners style of mixing up the chronological order made the story much more enjoyable to read and added a sense of the unknown for all of the readers. Looking back, I never would think that such a well respected woman like Miss Emily would turn out to be as unstable and insane as she was.
This story was definitely one of its own. It was a story that was very confusing that made the reader think about what was going on with every step of the passage of Miss. Emily Grierson. I agree with K.Dubb and never saw the end coming. It is very strange that a woman will kill the only man that ever loved her and still keep him there stored away. I also agree with bekaht12 as the use of the flashback in this story gave a better focus on each scene of Miss Emily's life. It was a very different story but one that kept the reader on the edge of his seat the entire time.
Post a Comment